Professional Documents
Culture Documents
documents for France. Accused-appellant told Priscilla that she can only help in the
processing of travel documents and nothing more. It was Priscilla who promised
employment to Maria and Marceliano. She received money from complainants not in
the form of placement fees but for the cost of tickets, hotel accommodations and
other travel requirements. She has the same defense for Analyn Olpindo whom she
met in Belgium.
After trial on the merits, the trial court found accused-appellant guilty of illegal
recruitment and four (4) counts of estafa. The case was elevated to the Court of
Appeals. Accused-appellant alleged that she never promised nor offered any job to
the complainants.She pointed out that not one of the complainants testified on what
kind of jobs were promised to them, how much they would receive as salaries, the
length of their employment and even the names of their employers, which are
basic subjects a prospective employee would first determine.
ISSUE: Whether or not Angeles is guilty with four (4) counts of estafa and one (1)
count of illegal recruitment
RULING:
1.) Illegal recruitment is committed when two (2) elements concur: 1) that the
offender has no valid license or authority required by law to enable one to lawfully
engage in recruitment and placement of workers; and 2) that the offender
undertakes either any activity within the meaning of recruitment and placement
defined under Article 13(b), or any prohibited practices enumerated under Article
34.
Article 13(b), of the Labor Code provides, thus:
(b) "Recruitment and placement" refers to any act of canvassing, enlisting,
contracting, transporting,
utilizing, hiring or procuring workers, and includes referrals, contract services,
promising or advertising for employment locally or abroad, whether for profit or
not:
Provided, that any person or entity which, in any manner, offers or promises for a
fee employment to two or more persons shall be deemed engaged in recruitment
and placement.
To prove illegal recruitment, it must be shown that the accused- appellant gave
complainants the distinct impression that he had the power or ability to send
complainants abroad for work such that the latter were convinced to part with their
money in order to be employed.